To be fair, I never read in the press release where WotC claimed Mystical Tutor was breaking the format like a lot of people have reasoned in their rebuttals towards the banning. The banning is shaking things up around the world, backlash is going to be felt in Seattle
Mystical Tutor's departure will weaken ANT. But what do you guys think about simply going like this
-4 Mystical Tutor
+3 Ad Nauseam
+1 Angel's Grace
You can still keep the consistency while using Angel's Grace as a backup button.
3 ANT
2 Tendrils
1 Angel's Grace
plus the usual ANT shell is what I'll try
Soul Siphon--- {U}
Tribal Instant---Wizard
Counter target creature spell. Scry 1.
Magic: The Gathering is a lifestyle, not just a game.
How would you ensure Angel's Grace is in your hand before going off? As a singleton, seems highly unlikely you'll want to sit on a winning hand while you wait to draw it.
I do want to continue discussing alternatives though. Is there anything else that can be done? I currently run 3 IT's, and I can certainly up it to 4. LED/IT becomes our primary tutor here, and with 4x Brainstorm and 4x Ponder, we could probably dig deep enough to find what we need. I'm really nervous about running more than 2 Ad Nauseam though....way risky especially now that we will average at least one turn slower.
Maybe we can run more main deck hate for some of our poorer matchups? What about 4x Bob? If your opponents want to swords/path him then that at least buys you a turn. If Bob gets bolted, even better since that's one less bolt coming at you.
Continue to run the original ANT shell; I think.
Up the IT count to four, and then with the remaining three slots put in three Preordain(once it comes out).
Protection slots should go up too; as there isn't an easy way to ensure drawing them.
One last thing about the banning, mystical tutor was never ever ever the problem in reanimator. Iona (and entomb), both are mistakes made by wotc... But because they are just too f*cking stubborn to admit their mistake in the first place they banned the next best thing in reanimator: Mystical tutor. This pisses me off to a degree I can't discribe (and I'm not the only one). AnT was never the problem, reanimator was. A problem created by unbanning entomb.
(maybe I should just be glad they didn't ban LED or Drit, imagine that....)
Man, banning LED? People would march on Wizards' headquarters. That's like banning Tarmogoyf
Fun speculation
You are clearly not very bright. Have you ever played the deck? Most of the times people win with the deck they Mystical for their missing piece or protection and that makes it so strong. Same thing with ANT, you tutor for protection or the combo piece and go off.
Tutor was keeping a lot of other decks down and this will open up design space in the format.
Oh, Im sorry, I could have SWORN that the last 2 SCGs were won by Creature-based decks. One of them not even blue.
Also, the Zoo vs ANT matchup is axctually pretty much the same as the Counterbalance vs ANT matchup, so I dont want to hear any shit about how ANT was unbeatable. If the problem was Reanimator (which was by no means, dominating) then just reban the fucking entomb.
I just congradulated the Zoo players for now having the best deck in the format
IMO we should be marching on WoTC, with words at least. The reason is not just Mystical Tutor or ANT - The reason is that we do not want to be treated like Vintage has been - with shitty contempt from the DCI
I have been writing a series of emails to relevant people in WoTC about this today, and I call upon everybody who cares about this issue to do the same. Words have power! And so do we, especially if we band together.
Again, this is not just about ANT -
This is about the future of Legacy, the format we love.
If you care enough to rant on here, you should be writing about your anger to the people who made this decision.
Cyrus - Give me some contacts and I will spread my love for the Legacy format unbanning cards rather than banning cards. Players are smart - we can find our own solutions.
U
Sorcery
Scry 2
Draw a card.
Serum Visions, but in reversed order.
The metagame will shift. Stop being irrational.
Well, here's an easy one for anybody to do. Go to this link, and hit the "Respond by Email" button at the bottom. Let's see if we can crash their inbox!
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazin...cmp=ilc-mtgrss
Past that, use your imagination. Anybody who you respect at ALL at WoTC, write an email to them explaining how you feel about this. Personally, I am going to write to Mark Rosewater, among others. I already wrote to David Brian-Marshall, regarding what I perceived to be the glaring ommision of any discussion in regard to the impact to Legacy of the DCI posting. The DCI told us that their rulings would be explained in "two articles", his being the first, and Tom La Pille's the second, to be posted about a week from now. Here's what I wrote:
*****************************************************
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:17 PM
Dear Brian David-Marshall,
Regarding your article "Pop Quiz with Trick Questions":
How does it feel to trample upon the feelings of Legacy players everywhere, by announcing a format-warping card banning without so much as a simple explanation?
I don't want to seem insulting, but this is what your article has accomplished. If you think I am alone, or even that my feelings are "on the fringe", I encourage you to look at how widespread the outrage is on the Source forums. While I don't play either of the affected archetypes, I cannot help but feel sadness for those players who invested years worth of time and effort into perfecting decks that, while never a serious threat to the health of the format, are now virtually unplayable.
Why does a supposedly "New & Improved" Extended, which will likely never have the prestige or player base of Legacy, merit nearly the entirety of your article, while Legacy receives not a pittance?
I cannot help but feel for the anguish of thousands of players around the world, for whom your article seemed like mere heaping of salt into the wound left by the banning of Mystical Tutor - and by extension, the decks that they cherished.
And I received this reply:
To be perfectly honest Mystical Tutor intel came in to me at the last minute for me and my assignment was to cover the Extended announcement. I am certain that Tom LaPille will write extensively about the decision regarding that decision next week.
- David Brian-Marshall
************************************************
In light of this, I would strongly recommend that people write to Tom La Pille, as he is supposed to be the public face of the DCI on this one, according to what David wrote me.
I just bought a week ago ANTS and feels a bit akward this decision...
As many said the format was healthy, and the improvement of ANTS wasn't that much focused on MT...
Seems an arbitrary decision, unexpected.
For those who said that it is better to spread options to some archetypes that didn't have a chance facing ANTS, like aggro decks, banning MT is like the same as banning SDT, because many, many decks don't have a response for Counter+Top lock...
Anyway, I'l probably writing something to Tom because it is a crucial mistake for me at least... Ain't claiming that they should ban all good cards in the format, cards that I don't like, but for sure banning cards in legacy shouldn't be took as something casual.
Bad thing you've done WoTC...
Obviously you've been hit by this personally, and I'm sure there are a lot more like you. In a format that is usually as stable as Legacy, where the $$ investment is so high, banning key cards really hurts people. Doing in it such an off-handed way, doubly so.
All I'm saying is for people to write to WoTC and express how this has affected them. The DCI needs to know that their job isn't just an "academic exercise" and that if they aren't careful, they will lose the faith of this community.
I just wrote to Tom asking wy they determined to ban this card...
It's pretty obvious anyway, but I don't feel it was so broken...
Leaving the sour news I'd like to introduce another way to think about ANTS or any other Storm combo involving LED's, IGG and Doomsday.
I think that's the way to go around MT.
Rit into Doomsday, previously chanted should be still a good maneuver...
Any thoughts?
Same here. I played it at the SCG Philly Open, and was all excited to start toying around with either a Doomsday hybrid or possibly NLS variant. Now I'm going to have to either give up the deck all together or drastically change how its played. Very frustrating and annoying.
I just emailed Tom as well, saying my 2 cents.
This is isn't the end of AdN-based Tendrils-decks, it's just getting a bit less consistent and, more importantly, has to fight harder against hate. Just add a protection spell, some digging and perhaps some other tutors and you should still have a very playable deck. And of course there are other Storm-variants less dependent on MT. I'm starting to think this isn't hitting Storm-combo as hard as it might seem. And maybe, just maybe, AnT actually was too good at fighting hate. The main reason I switched to this deck from Dredge was being tired of always getting screwed games 2 and 3 by too efficient hate cards. In the long run for the health of the format, combo decks should have problems post boarding, which is something AnT did not really have.
At least, I still love storm combo, and I will keep playing decks like that (if nothing else and contrary to popular belief, there is still Vintage :^D).
I'm sure Zoo and Goblins players are all having a joygasm rite now. but honestly those matchups arent even as one sided as people would like to believe. Now at the same time. how will the non U based decks feel if we all started showing up at large events with Belcher. To be completly honest. if i were sitting at a table with any non u based deck.. i'd much rather play against ant than belcher. Hell even playing something with force of will, i'd be much more terrified for the first few turns if i were playing against belcher as unless i lucksack into EE i am kinda dead to a in hand ETW.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)